IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
I don't know much about it Honey but when hospitals are full of people with this very infectious disease, are the nurses at fault? It is air borne. Perhaps they are doing all they can?
It may be that we need a lot less people with Covid in hospitals infecting the vulnerable. I suspect the panic hasn't helped that.
Honey
Wyot wrote: Honey wrote: Wyot wrote: But on a serious note how do we as a country recover from the mentality that it is a disaster when a 100 year old dies with Covid, but it is ok for a 40 year old to die of cancer in order to try and save him?
One disaster doesn't cancel out another disaster.
Yes, it is appalling that we cant have life saving treatment, and also appalling that a gentleman who was bedridden at home for weeks STILL contracted coronavirus. How?
If you prioritise C19 over everything else then this is a decision to prioritise one kind of life over another that requires justification. Cancelling one over another doesn't come into it.
Cap Tom: we have no idea what part C19 played in his death. Just that he had it when he died. How did he catch it? Well quite; our assumptions look to me increasingly unsound about what is effective in preventing infection.
This article is about the family explaining that he had actually been in hospital and then sent home to be attended by nurses.
I assume his family were not infected, as they were allowed into the hospital.
I am annoyed that everyone acts as if covid strikes randomly, when it is preventable, and nursing care is a huge source of the infections.
It is absolutely bonkers to accept it as inevitable that loads of people are given the virus in hospital, and to do nothing about it.
Can you imagine a chef using rotten meat in a restaurant, being upset when the customers die, and doing the same thing the next day while the nation claps for him?
I dont want to be rude or mean to nurses. I know that they often have a very hard job with crap protection and inadequate training, and are mostly doing the very best they know how, but people are dying unnecessarily, and that trumps hurt feelings.
It needs sorting out.
Green Man
Wyot
Honey wrote: Wyot wrote: But on a serious note how do we as a country recover from the mentality that it is a disaster when a 100 year old dies with Covid, but it is ok for a 40 year old to die of cancer in order to try and save him?
One disaster doesn't cancel out another disaster.
Yes, it is appalling that we cant have life saving treatment, and also appalling that a gentleman who was bedridden at home for weeks STILL contracted coronavirus. How?
If you prioritise C19 over everything else then this is a decision to prioritise one kind of life over another that requires justification. Cancelling one over another doesn't come into it.
Cap Tom: we have no idea what part C19 played in his death. Just that he had it when he died. How did he catch it? Well quite; our assumptions look to me increasingly unsound about what is effective in preventing infection.
Forums 
